Re: [gwt-contrib] Re: Configurable checks for GWT

I can see that most of the new usages (e.g. Optional.java) is incorrect. Can you guys fix those? On Mon, May 9, 2016 at 2:12 PM, Goktug Gokdogan wrote: > > > On Mon, May 9, 2016 at 12:52 PM, Jens wrote: > >> Hm ok, I think I got it. I would say my

Re: [gwt-contrib] Re: Configurable checks for GWT

On Mon, May 9, 2016 at 12:52 PM, Jens wrote: > Hm ok, I think I got it. I would say my Arrays.sort() example should > actually use a critical check then because array.slice() can do lots > unexpected things (negative indexes for either argument works but results > an

Re: [gwt-contrib] Re: Configurable checks for GWT

Hm ok, I think I got it. I would say my Arrays.sort() example should actually use a critical check then because array.slice() can do lots unexpected things (negative indexes for either argument works but results an unexpected subset of array items to be sorted, toIndex can be larger than

Re: [gwt-contrib] Re: Configurable checks for GWT

Thanks for asking; I think I never explained this well. This is mostly judgement call but in general the rule of thumb is: - Assume no checks as the starting point - Look at the code and see what will happen if we don't have the check: - If the missing check will leave the object in a very

[gwt-contrib] Re: Configurable checks for GWT

Sometimes I am not sure if we should use a normal or a critical check. Basically my understanding is that we should use a normal check if the code would also fail (but obviously with a JS error instead of a required Java Exception) with an error if the check was not present. If the code would